You are not logged in.

Evaluation of two instruments of perceived symptom intensity in palliative care patients in an outpatient clinic

Saetra, Pia, Fossum, Mariann, Svensson, Elisabeth and Cohen, Marlene Z 2016, Evaluation of two instruments of perceived symptom intensity in palliative care patients in an outpatient clinic, Journal of clinical nursing, vol. 25, no. 5-6, pp. 799-810, doi: 10.1111/jocn.13100.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Evaluation of two instruments of perceived symptom intensity in palliative care patients in an outpatient clinic
Author(s) Saetra, Pia
Fossum, Mariann
Svensson, Elisabeth
Cohen, Marlene Z
Journal name Journal of clinical nursing
Volume number 25
Issue number 5-6
Start page 799
End page 810
Total pages 12
Publisher Wiley
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2016-03
ISSN 1365-2702
Keyword(s) hospital
Norway
nursing
outpatient clinics
palliative care
rating scales
reliability
symptom assessment
test-retest stability
Summary AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the test-retest stability in assessments of perceived symptom intensity on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative. The possible interchangeability between the instruments and the patients' experiences of completing the instruments were also studied. BACKGROUND: The two instruments assess the same symptoms, but the symptom intensity is assessed on 11-point numerical scales on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised and on four-point verbal descriptive scales on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative. Both instruments are commonly used; however, uncertainty exists about which instrument should be recommended and about the interchangeability of the instruments. DESIGN: This study used a test-retest design with inter-scale comparisons. METHODS: Data from 54 patients with cancer who were receiving palliative care in an oncology outpatient clinic were self-reported by the patients in the clinic, at home and when patients returned to the clinic. RESULTS: The assessments on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative verbal rating scales showed a higher level of test-retest stability than the assessments on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised numerical scoring scales, indicating higher reliability. The correspondence between the verbal categories and the numerical scores of symptom intensity were low because different verbal categories were used by patients who assessed the same numerical score. CONCLUSIONS: The test-retest stability in the assessments was higher on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative and the results show that assessments on the two instruments could not be used interchangeably. Therefore, the symptom instrument chosen must be specified and unchanged within a patient to improve efficacy in clinical practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised or the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative can be used for initial assessments of patients, but should not be compared or used interchangeably. It is vitally important to have individual follow-up for all patients who score an instrument.
Language eng
DOI 10.1111/jocn.13100
Field of Research 111099 Nursing not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 920210 Nursing
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2016, Wiley
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30081092

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Nursing and Midwifery
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 56 Abstract Views, 2 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 02 Feb 2016, 13:36:38 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.